Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
If Stallman et al really wanted to "take control", they'd get Hurd working (ahem...for very large values of "working") and then slowly curb their userland base to make use of Hurd-specific functionality.
Kinda like 99% of the Linux community is doing to BSD nowadays.
Posted 04-21-2013 at 06:10 PM byrocket357 Updated 04-21-2013 at 06:13 PM byrocket357
I think Lignux is a cool acronym and it's suggested by GNU website as you can see:
Quote:
The problem with “GNU/Linux” is that it is too long. How about recommending a shorter name? (#long)
For a while we tried the name “LiGNUx”, which combines the words “GNU” and “Linux”. The reaction was very bad. People accept “GNU/Linux” much better.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.